9/11/2017

[DrKrettin]

.

Noooo. Your inference was that I harbor the idiotic prejudice that all Muslims are terrorists. Actually, I have no memory of mentioning anything about Muslims or Islam. I'm going to have to look at my posts. If I don't find any references, then guess who is New Kid On The Block (list)?

 

I am going to type very slowly...

 

When I write, I imply.

 

When you read what I write, you infer.

 

Your erroneous, baseless, gratuitous inference was created by your fantasy. Your fantasy.

 

And yet, when I said that a particular date meant nothing to me, this stupid person took it to mean that I cared nothing for the victims of an atrocity which took place on that date. How about that for an idiotic inference from somebody who is now criticising somebody else for an  "erroneous, baseless, gratuitous inference" ?

Edited September 13, 2017 by DrKrettin

[Maine farmer]

.

Noooo. Your inference was that I harbor the idiotic prejudice that all Muslims are terrorists. Actually, I have no memory of mentioning anything about Muslims or Islam. I'm going to have to look at my posts. If I don't find any references, then guess who is New Kid On The Block (list)?

 

I am going to type very slowly...

 

When I write, I imply.

 

When you read what I write, you infer.

 

Your erroneous, baseless, gratuitous inference was created by your fantasy. Your fantasy.

There is a song I hear from time to time on the radio that has the lyrics, "You say it best when you say nothing at all."  The words were meant for another context, but some may apply them to this situation.

 

At times when emotions run high, it becomes more important make such distinctions.  

[scherado]

...

I for one am willing to go out on a limb and say that I believe that you don't think "all Muslims support terrorists," but when I do that, we're still left with the question that I've posed several times in this thread without any acknowledgement from you, what was your purpose in opening this topic?

...

.

The timestamp of the OP is "10 September 2017 - 04:19 AM". Please refer to the two tags I chose for this thread.

[Buffy]

.

The timestamp of the OP is "10 September 2017 - 04:19 AM". Please refer to the two tags I chose for this thread.

 

The keyword tags say nothing about your intent. This is not a yes or no, question, you're being asked to explain your motivations and what goals you are trying to achieve.

 

 

A heart of stone doesn't know any better, :phones:

Buffy

[scherado]

The keyword tags say nothing about your intent. This is not a yes or no, question, you're being asked to explain your motivations and what goals you are trying to achieve.

...

.

I have an insalubrious relationship with my keyboard and screen--no offense to my hard drive.

[Deepwater6]

.

No, I have no festering emotions on the subject and I have no anxiety about what may be in planning stages.

 

I do have great concern about widespread misunderstanding, ignorance, denial, to name three.

 

The first part of your first sentence is wrong. There were people who celebrated in the USA, some in New Jersey. We all saw the celebrating "Palestinians" and the adults handing out candy to the children.

 

There are people in the USA who admire what was achieved on 9/11. Some were and are disappointed in the result.

 

The fact that should be acknowledged about Sept. 11, 2001: If both planes that struck the two towers at floore 50 or below, then 100,000 may have been killed because many more would have failed to evacuate and both towers would have collapsed sooner.

 

The hijackers could have toppled both towers in the seconds after impact. This was the desired result. That would have resulted in 250,000 dead.

 

It is ludicrous to evaluate an attack based upon the results.

 

3000 dead on September 11, 2001 was a damned lucky result.

Getting back on topic, what do you propose we do about the this widespread ignorance and denial? Should our government institute Marshall law here? Is there somebody we should be carpet bombing in the Middle East? What will ease your concerns?

[scherado]

Getting back on topic, what do you propose we do about the this widespread ignorance and denial? Should our government institute Marshall law here? Is there somebody we should be carpet bombing in the Middle East? What will ease your concerns?

.

Ignorance and denial of what?

 

I've never heard of "Marshall law." What would be the justification for Martial law, if that's what you mean? The only need I've seen for military law is proximate to any gathering of the group "Antifa". We would normally call that adequate police protection. Nevertheless, Martial law:

.

... law administered by the military power of a government when it has superseded the civil authority in time of war, or when the civil authorities are unable to enforce the laws. It is distinguished from military law, the latter being the code of rules for the regulation of the army and navy alone, either in peace or in war.

.

I doubt there is someone in the Middle East who warrants carpet-bombing. What's your reason for bringing up that severity?

[Buffy]

I doubt there is someone in the Middle East who warrants carpet-bombing. What's your reason for bringing up that severity?

 

So you're saying you have no idea what this refers to? Even as you seem to expect people to instantly recognize dates?

 

 

Prevent, or go thou, like Sir Actaeon he, with Ringwood at thy heels, :phones:

Buffy

[scherado]

I found the single one word, allusion to.... <*gasp*> I dare not repeat it, it nearly brought the house down.

 

... stay informed on the subject of terrorism and have observed the mayhem of jihadi murder, world-wide since 2001.

...

.

From the single word "jihadi" some conjured unsavory maladjustments (9.75 out of 10 on Euphemism Meter).

[scherado]

So you're saying you have no idea what this refers to? Even as you seem to expect people to instantly recognize dates?

...

.

Huh????

 

Can you be sure you're in the right thread?

 

Deepwater6, on 13 Sept 2017 - 6:19 PM, introduced the subject "carpet bombing": here from which I derive the quote and placed there.

 

If you look up a few posts you will see those two words.

 

Unbleeping believable.

[Buffy]

In response to Deepwater, you said:

 

I doubt there is someone in the Middle East who warrants carpet-bombing. What's your reason for bringing up that severity?

 

In response, I said:
 

So you're saying you have no idea what this refers to? Even as you seem to expect people to instantly recognize dates?

 

The latter sentence in that quote refering to your post #5 in this thread:
 

I re-read your reply and this time I don't think I know what is meant by "this confusing dat[e] convention". Let's try this date: February 26, 1993. What does this date signify and is anyone confused about this date?

 

Which you later clarified in your post #7 in this thread was a reference to the 1993 attack on the Twin Towers:
 

The man, "Ramzi Ahmed Yousef", who designed and helped build the bomb which exploded under the North Tower on February 26, 1993 said, after he was captured and interrogated, that his intent was to topple that tower onto the other tower, killing everyone within both towers and everyone below. That total would have been 50,000 minimum and up to 250,000.

It does not need to be stated that we can be sure as night follows day that there would be no reason to signify September 11, 2001 in relation to any towers had "Yousef" been successful on that day in 1993.

Now, on this forum we have a member, you "DrKrettin", who thinks the day on which actual, factual thousands who were killed in the successful toppling of those two buildings has no significance and to which ignored member #1 agrees.

This tells me there is something seriously wrong with "DrKrettin" and that I should add that name to my ignore list...

...which would appear to most folks to be a dismissive swipe at DrKrettin's ignorance about the date--since you had challenged him as to its significance in the previous post--as well as accusing him of saying that September 11 "had no significance" when he made quite clear that he was referring to "9 November 2001:"
 

...But when I see 9/11/2017, I understand 9th November 2017, as anybody in the world outside the USA would. People inside tend to forget that most of the world is outside.
 
No idea what that particular date 26/2/1993 signifies, but I'm guessing some atrocity in the USA

So indeed you were ridiculing him for not knowing the significance of February 23, 1993.

So, coming back to your last post:

 

Deepwater6, on 13 Sept 2017 - 6:19 PM, introduced the subject "carpet bombing": here from which I derive the quote and placed there.

If you look up a few posts you will see those two words.

 

Yes, he used those two words, and exactly like your reference to the 1993 bombing, he made an assumption that the reference to "carpet bombing" would be recognizable to anyone who followed the 2016 presidential election, where it played a recurring role for various reasons.

So it's obvious that it's okay for you to ridicule people for not knowing things that do not appear explicitly in this thread (like your reference to the 1993 bombing), but when someone else refers to something outside this thread, you insist that no one can criticize you for your own lack of knowledge about a fairly commonly known event that is only 18 months old let alone the one 25 years ago you seem to think everyone should know.

This is exhausting, but quite frankly your inability to both follow what people are saying to you as well as your own inability to observe your own behavior with any objectivity makes it very difficult for anyone to interact with you. I'm responding to you because it's my job to try to keep things from getting out of hand, but the other posts in this thread betray a widespread frustration with your, I'll be charitable, inability to communicate along with your easily energized consternation directed at just about everyone.

If you've followed this post this far, congratulations for making an attempt to actually understand what's going on, but I fear I'll just get another "huh?" and an insistence that something at the top of this post offends your sensibilities.

Please prove me wrong! :cheer:

And I'll repeat for a third time my request--not only for me but for the sake of the several people who are all asking you the same general question in this thread--explain your motives and goals in starting this thread. I doubt the discussion that has ensued is what you hoped to generate, so it begs the question, what sort of discussion did you want to engage in? Why?

There's no judgement in that question, just a desire to try to explain to people why you brought it up.


For God doth know how many now in health shall drop their blood in approbation of what your reverence shall incite us to, :phones:
Buffy

[OceanBreeze]

Blah blah blah blah.......

This is exhausting,

 

 

BLuffy

 

Indeed it is! And tedious.

 

And I'll repeat for a third time my request--not only for me but for the sake of the several people who are all asking you the same general question in this thread--explain your motives and goals in starting this thread. I doubt the discussion that has ensued is what you hoped to generate, so it begs the question, what sort of discussion did you want to engage in? Why?

 

There's no judgement in that question, just a desire to try to explain to people why you brought it up.

 

 

For God doth know how many now in health shall drop their blood in approbation of what your reverence shall incite us to, :phones:

 

 

Bullshit. There is nothing BUT judgement in your posts. You are the most judgemental person posting on this forum.

 

Since when does a person need to explicitly explain the motivation for any post to YOU?

 

You really do think you are the Queen of this little bitty forum don't you?

[sanctus]

Oceanbreeze, take a step back and ignore it is Buffy asking. Then, do you still think  it is illegitimate for any member (not only admins) to ask the poster about what his/her motivations for a post are, if it is not clear?

[exchemist]

Indeed it is! And tedious.

 

 

Bullshit. There is nothing BUT judgement in your posts. You are the most judgemental person posting on this forum.

 

Since when does a person need to explicitly explain the motivation for any post to YOU?

 

You really do think you are the Queen of this little bitty forum don't you?

I must say I think this is uncalled for.

 

Scherado's posts have been a litany of insinuation from the start, though she has carefully avoided explicitly stating her agenda. Scherado has been quick to take offence, quite needlessly attacking posters. She also expects them to possess psychic powers about what she is talking about, while avoiding being clear and explicit herself.  

 

The moderator's job in such cases is stop the fcuking around with people, surely?   

 

You may not like Buffy's stye, or her politics, but in this case it seems to me she is just doing a moderator's job. 

Edited September 14, 2017 by exchemist

[scherado]

There is a song I hear from time to time on the radio that has the lyrics, "You say it best when you say nothing at all." The words were meant for another context, but some may apply them to this situation.

 

At times when emotions run high, it becomes more important make such distinctions.

.

At any time "Argument from Silence" remains an error committed by some.

 

"Farming guy", and unnamed others, have been running examples of this error.

 

What commission of the error reveals is the anxiety within them, sometimes rising to genuine neurosis, and which is, most often, based upon the themes upon which their fixated accusations are made. Neurotic is as neurotic does.

[exchemist]

.

 Neurotic is as neurotic does.

Something on which we can all agree, at last. :)

[Deepwater6]

.

Ignorance and denial of what?

 

I've never heard of "Marshall law." What would be the justification for Martial law, if that's what you mean? The only need I've seen for military law is proximate to any gathering of the group "Antifa". We would normally call that adequate police protection. Nevertheless, Martial law:

.

.

I doubt there is someone in the Middle East who warrants carpet-bombing. What's your reason for bringing up that severity?

Sorry for the typo, but you still haven't answered my question, what should we do to ease your concerns?